Democratic citizenship and collective action:
Two types of legitimacy? Empirical (do people think it’s legitimate?) and normative (is it publicly justifiable?)
Challenges in negotiation? Doesn’t work for all issues; private/difficult to observe; potential for domination/power dynamics; not necessarily oriented toward common good
Why can distributive coalitions win? When benefits are concentrated and costs are diffuse, collective action easier for the (minority) beneficiaries than for the (majority) cost-payers
The Mancur Olson Doom Loop?
Not just that distributive coalitions get what they want and leave the public worse off
Why is the book called Rise and Decline of Nations?
The Constitution
Landed men in colonies elect legislatures; crown appoints governor.
Legislatures relatively empowered in domestic policy, but:
British empire practiced mercantilism. What’s that?
Goal: maximize exports vs. imports.
Can accomplish this through trade policy. Especially if you can compel colonies to make you their exclusive trading partner.
British extract resources from colonies, sell finished products back to them.
Restrict colonies’ rights to trade with other countries.
Difficult to prevent informal markets (smuggling, bribes to customs officials, etc.)
French and Indian War (1754–1763):
Bit of a misnomer.
North American theater of Seven Years War:
The British won, but the war was expensive
Which led to protests.
Nine colonies send representatives to “Stamp Act Congress” in New York
Draft list of grievances and codify “no taxation without representation.”
British repealed Stamp Act and revised the Sugar Act, but rejected representation
Townshend Acts:
Led to boycott of British tea (and a black market for Dutch tea – we’ll come back to that)
Boston Massacre: violent crackdown on protestors at Boston Customs House
Quickly influenced public opinion, with help (and some creative liberties) from Paul Revere
Soldiers involved later found not guilty of murder (defended by John Adams!)
Tea Act:
Merchants responded with the Boston Tea Party (and similar protests elsewhere), prompting harsh crackdown
First Continental Congress:
Second Continental Congress
Declaration of Independence: in so many words, revoking the social contract
Outreach to France
Articles of Confederation
Weak national government emerged from states:
This barely worked during the war
Problems with government under the Articles:
This puts the national government in charge of providing public goods. What are public goods?
Public goods: clean air, radio, national defense, open markets, debt reduction, e.g.
Goods that feel public but aren’t technically public: roads, “common-pool resources” like grazing pastures
Designates national government in charge of providing public goods. What are public goods?
Does so without empowering national government to enforce state contribution.
Economic downturn –> credit shortage –> foreclosures on small farmers (still owed for Revolutionary War)
Daniel Shays (not the only leader) and ~1,500 farmers marched on Springfield, MA to block foreclosures
Congress of the Confederation authorized national militia and $530,000 appropriation…but only one state (Virginia) contributed any money (< 1/2 of requisitioned).
Massachusetts government didn’t have enough money to raise state militia.
Eventually a privately-funded militia put the rebellion down, but the broader point was already made.
Dougherty, Keith, and Michael Cain. 1997. “Marginal Cost Sharing and the Articles of Confederation.” Public Choice 90(1): 201-213.
Originally called for the purpose of revising the Articles
Two problems to solve:
Key points:
What’s in the Virginia Plan?
What’s in the New Jersey Plan?
Key point: drafted in response to Virginia Plan.
Cleavages in material interest as much as philosophy.
Where did we land?
Different issues, different cleavages
Jillson, Calvin. 1981. “Constitutional-Making: Alignment and Realignment in the Federal Convention of 1787.” American Political Science Review 75(3): 598-612.
Large states (VA, MA, PA, e.g.) vs. small states (NJ, NY, DE, e.g.)
Large northern states (MA, PA) vs. large southern states (VA, NC, SC)
Why 3/5? Put slave states near 50% of the House (trending up).
Ends (NH, MA, NC, SC, GA) vs. middle
CT, NJ, and MD vs. everyone else
Everyone else wins these.
NH, CT, NJ, DE, MD, MA, and GA vs. VA, PA, NC, SC
Every state in some winning and losing coalitions
Final structure acceptable but not ideal for everyone
Legislative:
Executive:
Judicial:
Legislative:
Executive:
Judicial:
States retain sovereignty and powers not reserved to national government
We’ll talk about that more next week
Commerce clause: power to regulate interstate commerce
Necessary and proper clause (or “elastic” clause): grants implied powers beyond those specifically enumerated
Nine states needed to ratify Constitution.
Battle for public opinion: “Federalists” named themselves to avoid being called “nationalists.”
Once again, cleavages material as well as ideological:
| Federalists | Anti-Federalists | |
|---|---|---|
| Primary constituencies | Merchants, landed rich | Agricultural, small farmers/businesses, workers |
| Policy preferences | Centralization and checks on mass politics | Decentralization, more frequent elections, referendum and recall |
| International Affinity | British | French |
Why would merchants have a greater interest in a stronger national government?
You’ve heard of some Anti-Federalists: Patrick Henry, George Mason, James Monroe, Samuel Adams
Debate: Publius (Federalist) vs. Brutus and Cato (Anti-Federalist)
Are the Federalist Papers “founding” documents? Sort of, but not officially.
Point of order: what’s a “faction”? “…number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens.”
What are the primary cleavages Madison highlights as likely to produce factions?
Where do factions come from?
Freedom x Diversity = Factions that will press private interests (can’t assume “enlightened statesmen”).
Republican checks on “pure democracy” prevent tyranny of majority faction:
What does Madison mean by “pure democracy”?
“a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person”
Why do pure democracies have trouble managing factions?
What does Madison mean by “republic”?
“a government in which the scheme of representation takes place” – delegation of government to a small number of elected representatives
How does Madison think about collective action problems?
Good institutional design directs self-interest toward cooperation, monitoring, and sanction.
Small districts in a big legislature means:
“Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more difficult for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in unison.”
“Ambition must be made to counteract ambition,” using human nature to our advantage.
In order to leave the state of nature, even powerful individuals need to cede authority to a government. This works better in a larger “extended republic” with power distributed vertically and horizontally. Why?
Giving branches lanes to stay in gives them independent agency
Giving branches checks on each other ensures that none become too powerful…allows government to “control itself.”
Dividing power twice – first between federal and state governments, then between branches of federal government – provides “double security”
“In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates. The remedy for this inconveniency is to divide the legislature into different branches; and to render them, by different modes of election and different principles of action, as little connected with each other as the nature of their common functions and their common dependence on the society will admit.”
The Virginia Plan went about this quite differently!
Extended Republic means:
Why was this a winning argument for Madison’s audience?
Overwhelming rejection of monarchism
Adopted democratic principles/premises, but skeptical of practical features
No affirmative right to vote, franchise left to states
Concession made during ratification debate.
The first two didn’t make it! One found its way…in 1992.
https://www.history.com/news/the-strange-case-of-the-27th-amendment
I’m sure you know some of the ten that did.
(1) Free expression and religion; (2) right to bear arms; (3) no quartering; (4) no unreasonable search and seizure; (5) due process; (6) right to speedy trial by jury; (7) jury for civil cases; (8) no cruel and unusual punishment; (9) unenumerated rights to people; (10) unenumerated rights to states.
Many of these will come up again in later weeks on civil rights/liberties and the Courts.
Not the Third Amendment.
Liberal (protections for individual freedom):
Communitarian (provisions of local control):
It’s hard!
A few different pathways. All but the repeal of Prohibition have followed this one:
Amendments have tended to happen in spurts (post-Civil War, Progressive Era, Civil Rights Era).
Pope, Jeremy, and Soren Schmidt. 2021 “Father Founders: Did Child Gender Affect Voting at the Constitutional Convention?” American Journal of Political Science 65(3): 529-771.
Does anyone here know who Roger Sherman was?
Dougherty, Keith, and Jac Heckelman. 2006. “A Pivotal Voter from a Pivotal State: Roger Sherman at the Constitutional Convention.” American Political Science Review 100(2): 298.
Do we think they knew exactly what these terms meant?
Expectation of more frequent amendments as new issues arose.
We tend to rely on judicial review instead...but judicial review isn’t in the Constitution itself.
We’ll get to that in Courts week.
Is Madison right about extended republics?
Does the politics and compromise in the Constitution make it more or less impressive?
How successful has the Constitution been at preventing tyrannies of the majority?
Roche, John. 1961. “The Founding Fathers: A Reform Caucus in Action.”
Linz, Juan. 1990. “The Perils of Presidentialism.
Trende, Sean. “It’s Time to Increase the Size of the House.”
Why is it surprising the U.S. won the war? Weak central government struggled to coordinate on basic warmaking functions (food, supplies, ammunition, etc.)
Key expansions of national power? Commerce clause (interstate commerce expands over time) and necessary and proper clause (unenumerated powers to Congress)
Anti-Federalists main W? Bill of Rights
“Liberty is to faction what air is to fire”? If you want freedom, factions are a necessary evil
“Double security”? 1) Federalism; 2) separation of powers with checks and balances
Think outside the box! Some examples:
Ok, let’s unpack that…
Federalism
Guest speaker: Rep. Marcia Morey (NC-30)
Still read!